4 ms·
Eh. This entire tweet smacks of being AI generated. It has a huge amount of LLM-isms. I wouldn't be surprised if Sacks just prompted an LLM to just come up wit
by dwohnitmok 19d ago
Eh. This entire tweet smacks of being AI generated. It has a huge amount of LLM-isms.
I wouldn't be surprised if Sacks just prompted an LLM to just come up with whatever rebuttal to whatever the regulation side comes up (given the big set of regulation tweets) with sounds most convincing, given his usual anti-regulation stance.
Anyone with a Pangram account who can check?
- samename 19d agoPangram reports 100% AI generated https://www.pangram.com/history/410ce80f-bd0e-45b6-a82c-d6ed346418b7?ucc=mWCRrS9gkIu https://www.pangram.com/history/410ce80f-bd0e-45b6-a82c-d6ed...
- SpicyLemonZest 18d agoEven better, Sacks admitted in response to a Pangram check that he has an LLM line edit his posts (https://x.com/DavidSacks/status/2099040321351106807 https://x.com/DavidSacks/status/2099040321351106807). (He claims, bizarrely, that this means Pangram is "bogus" rather than accurate.)